THE OBJECTIVES OF THIS PROJECT ARE: (1) To identify and describe arbitration provisions and programs now employed or contemplated for the resolution of health and medical disputes, principally claims involving professional liability (medical malpractice); (2) To assess medical malpractice arbitration programs in terms of their own objectives and by comparison with other methods of resolution, especially conventional litigation; and (3) To collect and analyze cases (awards, settlements and other dispositions) completed and submitted under arbitration provisions and to compare such experience with litigation and screening. The survey and statistical studies are supplemented by: (1) the collection of legal information on arbitration in the health field (legislation, regulation, court cases affecting use of arbitration); and (2) the collection of studies on other aspects (economic, procedural) of malpractice arbitration. The first chart on current arbitration programs and plans for malpractice has been completed and another on screening and review panels will soon be available. A comparative study between arbitration and litigation in 16 California hospitals, also completed, indicates certain advantages for institutions with an arbitration option in filing and settlement of claims, time requirements and costs of defense. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES: Ladimer, Irving, "Prevention and Resolution of Medical Disputes," in Legal Medicine Annual, 1975, ed. C. Wecht, Appleton-Century-Crofts, N.Y., 1975. Ladimer, I. (and Bush, J.W.), "Is Arbitration the Answer to Malpractice Disputes," (debate) in Medical World News, Jan. 26, 1976.